العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolEPISCOPI VAGANTES
'''Episcopi vagantes''' ('Episcopus vagans', singular) (Latin for "wandering bishops") are persons who have been consecrated as Christian bishops in some irregular fashion, especially those claiming to have valid Roman Catholic orders through consecrations not authorized by that church.
Their claim is based on an understanding of the "validity" of apostolic succession that has been commonly accepted in Western Christianity at least since the time of the Donatist controversy. According to this understanding, a bishop is a true bishop if consecrated in a valid rite by a bishop even outside the boundaries and against the wishes of the Catholic Church as defined and represented by the Pope. However, some theologians, within the Roman Catholic Church and elsewhere, question whether all such consecrations have effect, on the grounds that an ordination is for service within a concrete Christian Church. Therefore an ordination ceremony that concerns only the individual himself does not, they say, correspond to the definition of an ordination and is without effect. Eastern Orthodox theologians and some others apply this also to an ordination for a heretical or schismatic Church.
The Holy See itself has made no declaration about the correctness or erroneousness of the theory of the need to be ordained within and for an existing Christian Church. While it has more than once declared that certain episcopal consecrations have no canonical effect, it has explicitly stated that it was not thereby expressing a judgement on the validity, in itself, of those consecrations, but merely on their canonical efficacy.
Thus, when it declared devoid of canonical effect the consecration ceremony conducted by Archbishop Pierre Martin Ngô Đình Thục for the Carmelite Order of the Holy Face group at midnight of 31 December 1975, it refrained from pronouncing on its validity. It made the same statement with regard also to later ordinations by those bishops, saying that, "as for those who have already thus unlawfully received ordination or any who may yet accept ordination from these, whatever may be the validity of the orders (''quidquid sit de ordinum validitate''), the Church does not and will not recognise their ordination (''ipsorum ordinationem''), and will consider them, for all legal effects, as still in the state in which they were before, except that the ... penalties remain until they repent" (Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decree ''Episcopi qui alios'' of 17 September 1976 - ''Acta Apostolicae Sedis'' 1976, page 623).
A similar declaration was issued with regard to Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo's conferring of episcopal ordination on four men - all of whom, by virtue of previous Independent Catholic consecrations, claimed already to be bishops - on 24 September 2006: the Holy See, as well as stating that, in accordance with Canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, all five men involved incurred automatic ("''latae sententiae''") excommunication through their actions, declared that "the Church does not recognise and does not intend in the future to recognise these ordinations or any ordinations derived from them, and she holds that the canonical state of the four alleged bishops is the same as it was prior to the ordination."[1]
In contrast, the Holy See has questioned neither the validity nor the canonical effect of the consecrations that the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre performed in 1988 for the service of the relatively numerous followers of the traditionalist Roman Catholic Society of St. Pius X that he had founded.
However, there is no proof that the numerical size or the ecclesiological attitude of the group was the reason for the different evaluations: other hypotheses could be put forward to explain them, including the fact that Lefebvre was obviously capable of forming the necessary intention. Some have questioned the mental capacity of Archbishops Ngô and Milingo to form the requisite intention to consecrate. On this question it would be extremely difficult to obtain a definitive objective judgement, especially in the case of Milingo. Ngô was advanced in age and was reportedly experiencing a dementia at the time of his actions in question.
Turning to the Eastern Orthodox Church, its official view has been summarised as follows: "While accepting the canonical possibility of recognising the existence (υποστατόν) of sacraments performed outside herself, (the Eastern Orthodox Church) questions their validity (έγκυρον) and certainly rejects their efficacy (ενεργόν)."[1] It sees
"the canonical recognition (αναγνώρισις) of the validity of sacraments performed outside the Orthodox Church (as referring) to the validity of the sacraments only of those who join the Orthodox Church (individually or as a body)."[2] This applies to the validity and efficacy of the ordination of bishops and the other sacraments, not only of the Independent Catholic Churches, but also of all other Christian Churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, and the Assyrian Church of the East.
The above-mentioned declarations by the Holy See that certain ordinations that may have seemed to it to concern essentially only the individuals themselves and not an existing Christian Church lacked "canonical effect" can be interpreted as in harmony with this Eastern view, with this difference: the Roman Catholic Church recognizes bodies such as the Eastern Orthodox Church as indeed Christian Churches, even if schism or heresy has brought separation about, and it therefore recognizes ordinations within these Churches as both valid and efficacious. However, as stated above, it has made no statement about the reasoning on which its declarations were based.
A distinction is also made between the conferring of jurisdiction (the power to govern lawfully) and the giving of sacramental power (the priestly power to validly sanctify and ordain). On this basis some consider that many, though not all, episcopi have the latter sacramental power, but not the former, which according to Roman Catholic canon law is required for valid celebration of the sacraments of Penance and Matrimony.
In some cases it is questionable whether a claimed episcopal consecration actually took place. This is a separate issue.
Members and clergy of Independent Catholic, Old Catholic, Continuing Anglican and similar groups usually see the term ''episcopi vagantes'' as a pejorative term.
Many ''episcopi vagantes'' claim succession from the Old Catholic See of Utrecht, or from Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, or Eastern Catholic Churches; a few others from Roman Catholic bishops that have consecrated their own bishops after disputes with the Vatican.
Many, if not most, bishops so labelled are associated with Independent Catholic Churches. These bishops may be very liberal or very conservative, including a significant number of gay clerics. ''Episcopi vagantes'' also include a significant number of conservative "Continuing Anglicans" who have broken with the Anglican Communion over various issues such as Prayer Book revision, ordination of women and the ordination of unmarried, non-celibate individuals (including homosexuals).
As stated above, the Roman Catholic Church recognizes the validity of episcopal consecrations in Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Old Catholic and the Assyrian Churches. Anglican ordinations, however, are not recognised as valid by the Roman Catholic Church due to defects of form and intention in the ordination rites used in the Church of England following the English Reformation. In recent times some have claimed to discern intimations from the Roman Catholic Church that the non-recognition of Anglican ordinations might be re-examined. The ordination of women in the Anglican Communion has complicated this issue.
★ "Flying bishops"
★ ''Episcopi Vagantes and the Anglican Church''. Henry R.T. Brandreth. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1947.
★ ''Episcopi vagantes in Church History''. A.J. Macdonald. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1945.
★ ''Bishops at Large''. Peter F. Anson. New York City: October House Publishing, 1963.
★ ''The Wandering Bishops: Apostles of a New Spirituality'' by Lewis Keizer. 2000 edition. [2] pdf
★ ''Independent Bishops: An International Directory'', edited by Gary L. Ward, Bertil Persson, and Alan Bain. Apogee Books, 1990
★ ''Episcopi Vagantes and the Challenge to Catholic Ministry'', an MA thesis by James Ford, Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, California, 1991.
Their claim is based on an understanding of the "validity" of apostolic succession that has been commonly accepted in Western Christianity at least since the time of the Donatist controversy. According to this understanding, a bishop is a true bishop if consecrated in a valid rite by a bishop even outside the boundaries and against the wishes of the Catholic Church as defined and represented by the Pope. However, some theologians, within the Roman Catholic Church and elsewhere, question whether all such consecrations have effect, on the grounds that an ordination is for service within a concrete Christian Church. Therefore an ordination ceremony that concerns only the individual himself does not, they say, correspond to the definition of an ordination and is without effect. Eastern Orthodox theologians and some others apply this also to an ordination for a heretical or schismatic Church.
The Holy See itself has made no declaration about the correctness or erroneousness of the theory of the need to be ordained within and for an existing Christian Church. While it has more than once declared that certain episcopal consecrations have no canonical effect, it has explicitly stated that it was not thereby expressing a judgement on the validity, in itself, of those consecrations, but merely on their canonical efficacy.
Thus, when it declared devoid of canonical effect the consecration ceremony conducted by Archbishop Pierre Martin Ngô Đình Thục for the Carmelite Order of the Holy Face group at midnight of 31 December 1975, it refrained from pronouncing on its validity. It made the same statement with regard also to later ordinations by those bishops, saying that, "as for those who have already thus unlawfully received ordination or any who may yet accept ordination from these, whatever may be the validity of the orders (''quidquid sit de ordinum validitate''), the Church does not and will not recognise their ordination (''ipsorum ordinationem''), and will consider them, for all legal effects, as still in the state in which they were before, except that the ... penalties remain until they repent" (Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decree ''Episcopi qui alios'' of 17 September 1976 - ''Acta Apostolicae Sedis'' 1976, page 623).
A similar declaration was issued with regard to Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo's conferring of episcopal ordination on four men - all of whom, by virtue of previous Independent Catholic consecrations, claimed already to be bishops - on 24 September 2006: the Holy See, as well as stating that, in accordance with Canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, all five men involved incurred automatic ("''latae sententiae''") excommunication through their actions, declared that "the Church does not recognise and does not intend in the future to recognise these ordinations or any ordinations derived from them, and she holds that the canonical state of the four alleged bishops is the same as it was prior to the ordination."[1]
In contrast, the Holy See has questioned neither the validity nor the canonical effect of the consecrations that the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre performed in 1988 for the service of the relatively numerous followers of the traditionalist Roman Catholic Society of St. Pius X that he had founded.
However, there is no proof that the numerical size or the ecclesiological attitude of the group was the reason for the different evaluations: other hypotheses could be put forward to explain them, including the fact that Lefebvre was obviously capable of forming the necessary intention. Some have questioned the mental capacity of Archbishops Ngô and Milingo to form the requisite intention to consecrate. On this question it would be extremely difficult to obtain a definitive objective judgement, especially in the case of Milingo. Ngô was advanced in age and was reportedly experiencing a dementia at the time of his actions in question.
Turning to the Eastern Orthodox Church, its official view has been summarised as follows: "While accepting the canonical possibility of recognising the existence (υποστατόν) of sacraments performed outside herself, (the Eastern Orthodox Church) questions their validity (έγκυρον) and certainly rejects their efficacy (ενεργόν)."[1] It sees
"the canonical recognition (αναγνώρισις) of the validity of sacraments performed outside the Orthodox Church (as referring) to the validity of the sacraments only of those who join the Orthodox Church (individually or as a body)."[2] This applies to the validity and efficacy of the ordination of bishops and the other sacraments, not only of the Independent Catholic Churches, but also of all other Christian Churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, and the Assyrian Church of the East.
The above-mentioned declarations by the Holy See that certain ordinations that may have seemed to it to concern essentially only the individuals themselves and not an existing Christian Church lacked "canonical effect" can be interpreted as in harmony with this Eastern view, with this difference: the Roman Catholic Church recognizes bodies such as the Eastern Orthodox Church as indeed Christian Churches, even if schism or heresy has brought separation about, and it therefore recognizes ordinations within these Churches as both valid and efficacious. However, as stated above, it has made no statement about the reasoning on which its declarations were based.
A distinction is also made between the conferring of jurisdiction (the power to govern lawfully) and the giving of sacramental power (the priestly power to validly sanctify and ordain). On this basis some consider that many, though not all, episcopi have the latter sacramental power, but not the former, which according to Roman Catholic canon law is required for valid celebration of the sacraments of Penance and Matrimony.
In some cases it is questionable whether a claimed episcopal consecration actually took place. This is a separate issue.
Members and clergy of Independent Catholic, Old Catholic, Continuing Anglican and similar groups usually see the term ''episcopi vagantes'' as a pejorative term.
| Contents |
| History |
| See also |
| Bibliography |
History
Many ''episcopi vagantes'' claim succession from the Old Catholic See of Utrecht, or from Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, or Eastern Catholic Churches; a few others from Roman Catholic bishops that have consecrated their own bishops after disputes with the Vatican.
Many, if not most, bishops so labelled are associated with Independent Catholic Churches. These bishops may be very liberal or very conservative, including a significant number of gay clerics. ''Episcopi vagantes'' also include a significant number of conservative "Continuing Anglicans" who have broken with the Anglican Communion over various issues such as Prayer Book revision, ordination of women and the ordination of unmarried, non-celibate individuals (including homosexuals).
As stated above, the Roman Catholic Church recognizes the validity of episcopal consecrations in Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Old Catholic and the Assyrian Churches. Anglican ordinations, however, are not recognised as valid by the Roman Catholic Church due to defects of form and intention in the ordination rites used in the Church of England following the English Reformation. In recent times some have claimed to discern intimations from the Roman Catholic Church that the non-recognition of Anglican ordinations might be re-examined. The ordination of women in the Anglican Communion has complicated this issue.
See also
★ "Flying bishops"
Bibliography
★ ''Episcopi Vagantes and the Anglican Church''. Henry R.T. Brandreth. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1947.
★ ''Episcopi vagantes in Church History''. A.J. Macdonald. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1945.
★ ''Bishops at Large''. Peter F. Anson. New York City: October House Publishing, 1963.
★ ''The Wandering Bishops: Apostles of a New Spirituality'' by Lewis Keizer. 2000 edition. [2] pdf
★ ''Independent Bishops: An International Directory'', edited by Gary L. Ward, Bertil Persson, and Alan Bain. Apogee Books, 1990
★ ''Episcopi Vagantes and the Challenge to Catholic Ministry'', an MA thesis by James Ford, Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, California, 1991.
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
